ASK MAULANA

Your Questions Answered

What characteristic trait is most essential in an individual so that he can contribute to national development?

The example of Toyota, Japanese automobile company, provides an insight into this question.

Toyota has been functioning for the last thirty years without a single day ever having been wasted, and without its production ever once having slackened. This is only one of the many examples which explain the fast development of industry in Japan. General Motors and the Ford Motor Company of the USA are the biggest motor manufacturing companies in the world. The annual production of these motor companies is, on an average, 11 cars per employee, while the Toyota Motor Company annually produces 33 cars per worker.

Considering the non-existence or at least paucity of all the major raw materials of industry in Japan—coal, iron, petroleum, etc.—Japan still manages to surpass all other countries in industrial progress. One might well ask why one commentator attributes Japan’s success to: “A national spirit of compromise and co-operation, and a willingness to endure short-term setbacks for the long-term good of the nation, company or family.”

It is temperament then which plays the most crucial role in the making of a nation. It is important in nation-building in the way that bricks are important in any kind of construction work. A house made of unfired bricks is unsafe, because any calamity, even a minor one, can bring it tumbling down. A building, on the other hand, which is made of kilnfired bricks can be trusted to withstand the onslaught of tempests and floods.

A character so tempered that it can be depended upon through thick and thin—like the kiln-fired brick—is what in the long run builds a nation, for it is only such a temperament which can remain attuned to the more and more complex procedures of industrialization and remain steadfastly geared to national progress.

Recently there has been a lot of activism seen throughout our country to root out corruption. What is the right approach to resolving the problem of corruption?

Everyone is worried and wants to have a corruption-free world. This in itself is a good desire, there is no doubt about it. But such a desire can be achieved only through adopting the right method towards its fulfilment.

People, both political and non-political, are fascinated by the concept of raising voices against evil. Every day there are some examples of the use of this method. Some people are speaking on stage, some are protesting on the streets, some are organizing paidal-yatras, while others are trying to produce the required result through the ballot box.

The purpose of all is common, that is, to raise their voice against social and political evils.

These methods have been in use for more than half a century, however, the required result is nil. The situation is akin to sowing the seed but having no yield in return.

Why have these efforts failed to produce positive results? The reason is very clear. Social change cannot be brought about through demonstrating on the streets, it is brought about by changing people at the intellectual level. Social change is not an issue of street activism, it is an issue of intellectual activism. The only way to social change is one, that is, education, both formal and informal. This method seems to be a very long-term method, but according to the law of nature, any substantial result is achieved only by long-term planning. Shortterm planning cannot produce any valuable result. Social construction or nation building is like growing oak trees. If we perform this task in the right way, a time will come when nation building will have become a reality. However, if we do not adopt the right method to carry out this task, then even after thousands of years of effort we will not be able to achieve our target.

To eradicate corruption, we have to give individuals a goal greater than money. The pursuit of wealth will only lead to discontentment, while the pursuit of wisdom will always lead to contentment. Only the content can abandon corrupt practices. To achieve this goal, we have to address individual minds, not attract crowds. A spiritual revolution cannot be brought about by a mob. And only a spiritual revolution can root out corruption. Education is the first step towards the construction of a nation. There can be no other beginning to the journey.

What is the most pressing issue confronting India as a society today?

In present-day India, the sphere of education and employment is vitiated by favouritism. But if the government in power were to take decisions which were merit-based instead of favour-based, the class of people who reaped benefits from the favour culture might become discontented, thus making the government’s second term doubtful. But, the result would certainly be the coming of a new culture in India, which would usher in an age of quality education and services. Thus, a process of sound development would be initiated.

India’s basic problem is the lack of quality in education, services and administration. The only reason for this is favouritism, which inevitably thrives at the cost of quality. This policy may benefit some individuals, but because of it the nation as a whole suffers. Quality in work comes into evidence when everything is based on merit. Those who make the second term their concern will only take popular decisions. But, one whose concern is the nation will take realistic decisions.

The issue facing Indian democracy is not who won the elections. Rather, the losers should willingly accept defeat, while the winners should make the availing of present opportunities their sole concern. In such a situation, the present party may lose the second term, but because of its efforts, the country will have been set in motion along the path of progress.

In developed countries, the principle of ‘compete or perish’ works in every field. ‘Compete or perish’ is not a negative concept. In fact, it means ‘stand up through competition and save the nation from perishing.’

Thus, whenever there is development, there will, at the same time, be the voicing of complaints or grievances, which have to be dealt with. Otherwise, the process of development will come to a standstill. The concern of democratic administrators should be the nation rather than the immediate wishes of the voter community. The real issue for them must be whether or not the nation is moving towards holistic development in the long-term.  

Often we see that a minor dispute between two individuals leads to a full-fledged conflict between groups representing the two individuals. How to avoid such instances?

People nowadays tend to resort to violence at the slightest provocation from others. When the losses of meaningless quarrels are pointed out to them, they seek to justify themselves by saying that they were not the aggressors and that their opponents had forced them to take to fighting. “We didn’t fight!” they retort. “It was those people who did it! They conspired against us to make us fight.”

Such people do not know that “not to fight” is not simply that if no one fights you, you do not fight with anyone. "Not to fight" means that if someone comes to fight you, still you should not fight with him. Nonviolence does not mean remaining peaceful so long as no one is acting violently towards you. It means to refrain from violence even in face of violence. If someone seeks to provoke you, you should not allow yourself to get provoked. If someone conspires against you, you should render the conspiracy ineffective through wisdom and silent, positive action.

Unity is crucial for the joint working of the citizens of a country, so that they can contribute to the successful advancement of their nation. How should we practice this unity?

When the Indian journalist Khushwant Singh visited Japan, he enquired about the prospects of the legal profession there. He was told that it was not a flourishing business. The reason being the fact that the Japanese preferred settling disputes on their own to suing in the courts. Willingness to admit faults by each party is the surest way to bring quarrels to an end. It is only when either party seeks to place the whole blame on the other side that the quarrel takes a turn for the worse. Whereas the very gesture of shouldering the blame softens up the other side, with the result that the dispute dies a natural death.

This realistic attitude has greatly benefited the Japanese in many respects. For instance, this makes them place their trust in one another. Thus they save the time and money they would otherwise expend on lengthy legal documents. Most of the commercial institutions trust in verbal understandings. Formerly it was practiced only among Japanese, but now foreign investors have also started to take advantage of this practice. Avoidance of unnecessary legal obligations invariably speeds up the work.

Essentially, such an outlook gives rise to unity. It is undoubtedly the greatest force that contributes to the success of a nation. In the words of an expert of Japanese affairs, the secret of Japan’s success lies in:

“Never quarrelling amongst themselves, always doing everything together.”

If you fail to act you cannot
compensate for it by speaking more.